>> since this is the right to the meeting of the san francisco planning commission for thursday, december 9th, 2010. the first category on your calendar, items proposed for a

continuance. commissioners, further on your calendar, item number nine, please note that the project has been withdrawn. the matter is no longer before you. with that, i am not aware of any other item on your calendar proposed for continuous. >> is there any public comment on items proposed for continuance? if not, you may make your comments, commissioner more.

>> why was this not done? >> we will hear a report on the update with the academy. the project sponsor withdrew the application and there's not anything that we can do to would force that ford -- to enforce that forward. >> is there a motion? >> move to continue item numberone to the date specified. >> is there a second? >> second. >> commissioners, on the motion for a continuance, -- >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye.

>> thank you, that item has been continued through january 13th, 2011. commissioners, that category on your calendar is commissioners questions and matters. item number two is the draft minutes of the october 21st joint hearing with the commission. that was on your calendars last week and there is a lot of concern about the action of that item. you continue to this item to today. following public comment and any modifications and corrections you may have, we would ask that you would adopt the draft minutes. >> is their public comments on the draft minutes of thursday, october 21st?

>> the transcript is not available, you have to get it from the department. -- did not get a copy. i talked to her last night and asked her if she had done the revisions and if she's still working on them because she does not have a transcript. she was the one working on the findings. the findings are not totally accurate. the reciting of what happened is not totally accurate. thank you. >> is there further public comment? if not, public comment is closed. >> i never saw the minutes. i had in complete packages from the previous week as well as this week and i tried to go between the meeting report and

the outcome of what was counted and approved but the package was in complete and i have not even seen the previous memo. i would ask that we continue this a little bit further out. >> that a motion? >> yes. >> is there a second? >> seconded. >> demotion to continue -- of the motion to continue. >> there is only one more hearing this year, that would be december 16th. if it needs to go further, it can go further. it electronicly until that -- until that is done. i have a hard cope.

so if you want a transcript, can make copies. and provide those for you but it is not in electronic format. >> that would be fine, including the memo which i do not have. if you would indicate whether or not you want a hard copy, i'll make that happen for you. >> i'll make you all hard copy. by doing so, i'll just -- if i get someone to scan it into the system for me, i will be able to make it electronicly available to everybody. >> okay. could woe then make sure because the meeting was rather long, it is not coming next wednesday, wee get it within a reasonable time to review it properly depending on what each of us is interested in. >> as soon as it is scanned into the system, i will send it out. >> i might suggest that, unless there's reason to do this sooner, i might suggest we

simply wait until the first january meeting, if it is only a week. >> i agree. >> so this will be continued to january. 13th of october. >> there are a couple of of commissioners that would like to speak if we could hold off for a moment. commission you are sugaya. >> no. >> antonini? >> i think my question was answered, we'll have the transcript in hard copy and the present minutes and any revisions that may be proposed. i'm not proposing any modifications to the minutes. those are -- athat's what happened. okay thanks. >> on the motion for continuance

to january 13th, commissioner antonini. >> aye. >> moore aye sugaya aye miguel aye. thank you commissioners those minutes are continued until january 13th. any other commission matters? >> i would like to introduce to everyone our newest commissioner, the ports' loss our gain, rod they fopping. many of you worked with him over the years and -- it is a pleasure to have a a long time san francisco family represented here, someone who has -- has been active within the city government and has been active within the business interests of the city and understands business and nappeds the general tourist business that is the backbone of some of our economy.

we welcome you rodney. >> great. >> anything you would like to -- >> thank you so much. i'm absolutely more thanned to serve the city, looking forward to working with you. and sharing comments, sharing thoughts about shaping san francisco. so, looking forward to it. honored. thank you so much. >> good to have you with us. >> would it be all right? >> mike, can i go first? >> go ahead. >> on -- on november 18th, when he a commission, a commission hearing on a restaurant that wanted to have amplified music. and it was an italian restaurant and the music was going to enhance the on pra singing that took place there. i'm going to read a apology letter that i just delivered to supervisor al yotty pier's office. i was trying to do this off-the-cuff, but i may screw it

up and i may read most of it instead. 0 that was the first part of the letter. to continue this testimony by members of the public was extremely supportive, and created a positive atmosphere that carried over into the planning commissioners com pent period. we were i believe all in a good mood. it was in that context that i made the remarks that are now the subject of your supervisor al yotey pee's from posed resolution which was -- what was introduced, i suppose is the right word on tuesday in which was offensive to those with an italian heritage. although it was not meant to be a disparaging comment, i see now it was very inappropriate. for that i apologize to you, to those in the audience at the time and to others who have either heard about what i said oar seen it on s.f.g.t.v. i do not take my responsibilities as a city commissioner lightly.

and in am no stranger to discrimination and the derogatory words of others. there's times dill yens is not at hand when stealing one's sensitivities may work against one's best judgment. as you set for the in the draft resolution, we represent the entire city and should treat members of the public with respect they deserve. i truly regret making my comment and hope you and the community will accept this apology. delivered as i said this morning -- to supervisor al yotty pier's office and a copy was delivered to president david chiu's office. thank you. >> commissioner, anton niney. >> i want to mention, i met with project sponsors last week on the project that will be before us next week, 22001 market, if i'm not mistaken on the address

which was the former s.n.c. ford. it was informative and helpful to get a preview of what will be before us. >> and i -- aye -- i had meetings this week, the past week with the bicycle coalition on their -- on their plans for the next number of years. mission street project, i have the -- the pleasure of having lunch with the new supervisor and -- in district 10, mel leah kohn and last night, the fire department, and a rather large and well represented group on a discussion chaired by our director on the housing element. that worked out very well. >> commissioner, sugaya. >> yes. to miss avery on the advanced calendar we received last week,

there's no january 6th hearing. is that correct? >> that's correct. thank you. and i like to also welcome the now com pigser and -- hope that in four years, his hair is not as gray as mine. i think that's okay. >> the reason for can selling the december 6th is the -- is the de-- department is on hiatus the last week of dem and preparation would be impossible. >> commissioner anton niney. >> i like to welcome commissioner fong and look forward to working with him. >> january 6th, not december 6th. >> thank you. >> sorry. >> misspoke. thank you. we could move forward on the calendar. we're knot now at director's reports and announcements. a review of the past week's events the board and the

historic preservation commission. >> i will also on behalf of staff and the department welcome commissioner fong to the commission. we look forward to working with you. a couple of other announcements. last night, i convened a group of interested parties on the housing element as president miguel mentioned. thank you for coming to that meeting. it was a hively discussion. there was maybe 20, 5 people this the room and we committed to -- to getting out the third draft of the housing element in about a month. convening a group again to have what i thought would be the final discussion on the details of the element in order for your consideration if february and march. that's the current schedule that we're hoping font element. a this is the 2009 housing element and we're three weeks away from 011 and concerned about getting this thing moved along. a reminder on saturday morning that the department is hosting a meeting for interested parties on our -- what we call our action plan, kind of the final

stage of our reform process. and we will be reviewing in detail our proposed development review process that would -- that was the subject of your memo last week. we have a meeting at 10:00 a.m. saturday at the department and we will be putting that on your calendar in january for a public hearing as well. i think that concludes my comments unless there are questions. >> thank you. >> i'm not aware of a represent from the board of vfers. was it appealed? >> i have a board update. the board met last night. there were three items that the board dealt with that i think the com pigs might be interested in. the first two we're hearing requests. the first was a hearing request for the notice of violation and penalty at 460 townsend, the property they acquired postenvironmental application, to pursue enforcement on it. the board denied the rehearing request. once their notice of decision and order sished then -- then

penalties up to $250 a day will accrue against the property. the second was a rehearing request at 1321 for a variance. this is a project that was a discretionary review that had been before the commission. it was -- it was a -- a hearing request. that reharg request was denied. that project could move forward with the permit application. the final was a pell of a variance for 1966 grate great highway. it was a discretionary review that was heard by the commission december of last year and the commission voted to take discretionary review and increase the front setback on there which also required a variance. the neighborhood appealed it. the board heard the item last night and voted 3-2 to overturn the variance. four votes are needed to overturn a departmental action. that motion failed and the variance was upheld. the building permit will be issued in the next few months. that's all. >> thank you.

let me note that the historic preservation commission did not meet >> i have one speaker card on public comment. francisco. my name is francisco. i'm going to comment on the director's report and the apology made by one of -- one of you to e-today. i attend meetings at city hall unlike most of y'all, many meetings. i observe the board of supervisors very carefully. i have known and watched mr.

sugaya for a long time. he's a decent man and a man of character. as has been witnessed today by his apology. i was supposed to talk on this top pick at the other public comment and i'm going to address it now. what we have here is a storm in a teacup. we need -- i'm talking about a board of supervisors, and i'm talking at the planning department. we need people to address the issues at hand. oftentimes when i go to the board of supervisors trying to defend our kirn and those who are adversely impacted, it is a slame it is a shame when the supervisors who are attached to the hip of the mayor including

the supervisor that asked for this apology have this consideration whatsoever to the -- to adversely impact the populace, in our case the bay view hunter's point and check out our children and our women. it is then i think some have -- some apology is required to the public at large. again, mr. sugaya is a decent man. man of character. he's done the right thing because in society, we call it, you have to do it because it is politically correct. i stand up and i -- i call on the mafia that had been involved

in our community directly and indirectly. i kay say that because i work for the military and i have access. i know what is happening in our community, and i know who is -- is behind the developers. i know that three good commissioners in this planning department who have always stood by the community. thank you so much. >> sue hester. i don't think you had a report from land use. waint to talk about what happened at land use. the is sequ amendments are going through the board. they were continued to next monday, with the exception of commissioner fong who i need to add to my list. i sent all of the commissioners and mr. ram a letter saying what i am asking the board to do. what i am asking the board to do and what i'm asking this commission to do is to start

thinking about how your process of hearing major case that is have e.i.r.'s has become dysfunctional. i'm asking the board to change the appeal time from e.i.r. certification to project approval for projects that have e.i.r.'s. this wasn't a problem before the state put in this appeal process to the board of supervisors. all of the big hearings and with e.i.r.'s and i'm most familiar with the downtown man which i was heavily involved in for years had multiple hearings on legislation that was major. that you had an e.i.r. certification followed by commission deliberations which was thoughtful about the changes because you currently have a process that says, you have to appeal an e.i.r. within 20 days

of the certification, the department puts together these monster hearings and your first in tra structure there really can't be -- can be thoughtful commission discussion or amendment of complex litigation. complex code violation. complex legislation, complex general plans. even though you had your one and only hearing in june, you -- you can as individuals talk to supervisors and i encourage it. the other changes that i'm asking them to do. i want the notices to go for environmental to tenants, not just owners because you have lost the ability to -- to give notice to tenants in common on environmental projects because -- because the way they're structured, there's only one notice. it may go to a property manager. there's changes that you asked for when i listen to the hearing that totally got lost.

as well as we need a provide process for projects that have general -- general -- monster e.i.r.'s like easter neighborhoods. we don't have any notice process for the exemptions on that. soim i'm going to the board, i'm not end running you. i'm going tell you what i'm doing. i really think that the commission needs to think through -- are you being well served right now by having joint hearings with rec and park and the commission or redevelopment and the commission or h.p.c. and the common mission, whenever you have an e.i.r. for major change? i think -- i think that you all would be better served to have time to think through and consider amendments to this kind of big legislation. thank you. >> thank you. is there any other public comment on the director's. this is not gem public comment. this is comment on the

director's report. okay. director ram. >> i think -- i think just to let you know, ann marie rogers prepared a report on the board action this week and got mixed up on the time. she's on her way. if we could delay that for a few minutes. certainly. >> i'll say regarding the item miss hester made, it is not required to come back to the commission. there are a number of changes that we have serious concerns about and we could discuss that when emery makes her report. >> you cannot discuss them because it is not on your calendar. but he can at he's let you know what they are. >> she can update us. >> she could make the report and have comments. >> they could -- but you can't have a discussion. >> no. >> okay. commissioner, ant niney. we're getting a report from ann marie rodgers and we'll be able to ask questions.

>> okay thank you. >> okay. knowing that we're expauge to this item f we could move forward only the calendar at this time, to item number six, this is the department's budget you have date. good morning commissioners, i'm the chief administrative officer. i'm here today to start to -- to get in the process of discussing the development of the 1112 budget. i have updated presentations from what was in your pacts because since then the mayor's office has released the budget and -- instructions so i have included the information. >> yeah. first thing i wanted to go over was the -- was the schedule that we're proposing for the commission review of the 11-12 budget. today's december 9th. i'm going to briefly go over the status of the current year

bidget and then some -- some, some -- i -- items that we need to consider how we're going to fund next year. next wednesday we're -- we're planning to go to the historic preservation commission to do the sail present tage. on the 13th of january, we're proposing to bring the department draft goals and work program for 11-12 and then have that discussion at historic preservation commission on the 19th as well as a discussion of some budget options for preservation work. on the 27th we come back to the planning commission to discuss balancing options for the budget . then we will go to get approval on the budget for historic preservation work. then come back to the manning commission to get final approval of the budget. the budge set due to the mayor's

office on february 22nd. that's the schedule we're proposing for budget review. >> i'm going to briefly go over the 10-11 budget status. the revenues and expenditures and grants. priority that is we identified for 11-12 and then briefly go over the player's budget instructions. >> for -- for the -- for the current year, we're -- at this point we're assuming that we're going to be on budget with the revenue that assumes that -- that the revenue he collected if the first five months that after ram is going to continue. as you could see, from the chart there -- we're projecting a shortfall environmental review fees. we increase this budget by 59% over last year and -- this doesn't look like we're going to achieve that target. the review fee had a drawdown from deferred credit. we're seeing increased revenue

in permit fees, the first between categories -- building permit authorizations and that will offset it. and the expenditure side of the budget where we should be on or bhow our bedge et appropriation. last month this was a -- or actually in october, there was a memo issued to the commission. i talked about the grants that we -- that -- we achieved, the budget assumed $4.5 million in grants. as you know, we brought a grant writer position on that has been successful in procuring grants. right now we have $7 million in grant that are awarded to the manning commission. 5.5 of that is going to support work in other areas -- in other agencies, like public works and the p.u.c. it is this is an updated list of the $7 million. i won't go through the item but there's